Isn't it interesting that The Washington Post drops its long, sympathetic article about a rapist after the election is over? Rape (strangely) became a huge issue in the past campaign season, and it dramatically hurt the Republican Party to have 2 senatorial candidates that said something stupid related to rape (both inept efforts at pro-life sentiment).

And now here's this big WaPo article about a man who committed many rapes — "more than a dozen rapes by his count, although police think there were probably many more."

The man was arrested in March 2011, so it's not as if this is late-breaking material. This is an elaborately worked-out invitation into the mind of the rapist that expects us to care about his struggle to understand himself. "It’s awful. It’s scary. . . . I don’t know why I couldn’t just stop." And: "I understand I need to be punished... Now tell me what the hell is wrong with me."

To me, it relates to the “broken windows” theory of crime prevention: The petty criminal — the burglar, the thief, the minor dope dealer — is potentially capable of serious crime. The defiant anti-social personality who finds himself able to get away with petty crime will tend to develop an arrogant contempt for the law, which leads to the pattern of escalating [recidivism]. Thus, more stringent enforcement of laws against relatively minor offenses will ultimately tend to reduce the number of serious offenses.

No, it's not particularly interesting that the Washington Post published its article after the election is over because it also happens to be a few days before the East Coast Rapist is sentenced, hence, it is newsworthy.

Sure, he was arrested in March 2011, but he'll be in court on Tuesday.

And for what it's worth, the Post also published articles about him in April and June. Not everything is a conspiracy.

Perhaps he can add homosexual rape to his repertoire of evil. If he makes this slight adjustment, there is an excellent chance that this troubled soul will at long last find happiness and a sense of belonging when he is incarerated.

Apt though. The media just raped us and now helps us understand the thinking of the minds that do such things. I already know. Democrat. Socialist. Wanted something somebody else has. Envy. So took it. And then rejoiced. Slave-descendent mentality. What's more to know? Look at yourself and you'll know the mind of a rapist.

My undercover serf-mind research is coming along fine on my own without newspapers telling me how specific rapist think.

The lesbians screaming as the results rolled in keep coming to mind. Rolls of lesbian screaming like I've never head before. Screaming. Screaming. Screaming and screaming and screaming and screaming and screaming continuously and joyously finally getting something they wanted so desperately like the quiet lonely Obama poster in their window worked MAGIC They were in ecstasy as the state results rolled past late at night. I never heard anything like that and never will again. I cannot penetrate that rapists' mind. Why are they so happy? I do not know. I still do not get the deep need that makes such things that preceded success okay. The continuous loud obnoxious charges of racism at each juncture, the answer to every question that still happens, homophobia a ridiculous madeup charge so easy to make that continues, sexism, immigration haters for not just accepting without deliberation wide open just walk right through borders, the constant incredibly antagonistic divisive charges and you get what you think that you want and BLAM everybody's sweetness and light just like that. I really really really don't want to know you. And that's why I pushed you away one-by-one.

Today's Sunday. I might call off dinner with Joe. A wealthy man. Votes Democratic automatically. Owner-mentality but he's still thick as mud. I'm not sure I can look at him anymore without seeing a moron, only bothered because he can be relied on to broadcast anything I wanted. Television, telephone tell Joe but now I'm caring less and less about broadcasting anything at all because there's nobody interesting to broadcast anything to.

You see, now that we're proper socialists all my thinking about other people has changed.

Everything changed. I look at everybody and I mean everybody as dark mean-spirited bleak-hearted needy damaged people which will require extra delicate special tender serf-management handling like this:

PhilI do too. I'm afraid there are lots of things we want back that we won't get back.The angry, bitter gloaters will enjoy that. Why they're so angry and bitter in victory must be something in their character. I thing it's a smallness like the endless small things that went into the Democratic victory.Discouraging.

Don't ever give up on your efforts to pronounce a political philosophy on rape! Just don't!

Unfortunately some tard republican right to lifer made some very offensive comments about rape, and cost R's a senate seat. So this idiot made it a potent issue for D's.

At least the guy was honest about what he thought, and he the perfect caricature of a woman hating R. And he was obnoxiously stupid too, never realizing that his stupid idea hurt not only Rs everywhere, but his own position.

On the other hand, if the press were fair, and honest with D's, such as if they had laid the origin of the housing bubble on Barney Frank's lap where it belongs, do you really think D's would be where they are?

If the press had been clear about the great social security ripoff, do you think we would be where we are? I doubt it.

Mumpsimus said...Rape (strangely) became a huge issue in the past campaign season . . .

Do you really think so? I don't. I think the rape gaffes, like all the other gaffes (47%, voting is the best revenge, etc.), mattered only to partisans hunting for gotchas.

==============In the case of 3 pro-life absolutists running for the Senate a position that women should be forced to bear the rapist's baby was lethal.In 3 States Romney carried.It also is a factor in Michelle Bachmann's near defeat and exit polls indicate only Bachmann's gender saved her from woman's wrath on her Right To Life zealotry.

There were gaffes that mattered, as the moron Akin & Co now know..

And gaffes that didn't matter.

Romney's gaffes fall in the middle, as the liberal and progressive jewish masters of the media and Obama's "brain trust" - milked them for all they were worth.Romney's innocuous comment about how the Brit Press had noted organizational problems was spun immediately by Obama and the media's adept to how naive and "out of touch" and "not like us" he was. It had a cumulative effect.

"You see, now that we're proper socialists all my thinking about other people has changed."

I don't think this is quite right. What we're more likely heading toward is a managed authoritarian oligarchy. The socialized medicine is more directed at keeping the working class subdued, available, and culled.

The Obama gaffes were either swept under the rug by the liberal and progressive Jewish media masters as soon as they happened...

Or handled stupidly by the Romney Team.

"You didn't build that" somehow went away from people, not government creating things as a group of customers, employees, vendors, and owner-exec-entrepreneurs that are 75% of US voters to endless talks praising ONLY the Owner-Exec-Entrepreneur at the top of the pile as the ONLY BUILDER...less than 1% of US voters.

Smack the Republicans with a cluestick. Building a successful business, even a restaurant, doesn't start or end with the boss.If you, say, want votes from people that made Apple a success, you have to go past worshipping Steve Jobs as a Divine Jobs Creator and look at who else "built" Apple. The loyal customers are builders. The store sales people are builders. The people who once built Apple products in US factories before they moved production to China are Builders.

Unfortunately some tard republican right to lifer made some very offensive comments about rape, and cost R's a senate seat. So this idiot made it a potent issue for D's.

I don't think it was unfortunate. I think it was inevitable and about time. It affords everyone a view into the minds of those who would engineer a campaign rallying cry of "Save the Rape-Babies!" An edifying demonstration of this politically is available here.

IN any event, it shows you just how far warped a party's priorities might be. If they are that far off-base from reality when it comes to justifying rape as a form of life-giving, it isn't hard to guess how many other ways that they've deviated massively from the celestial orbit.

I’m not seeing much of anything being written about the powerful role played by the MSM in the election. It all now seems to be, wow, the “brilliance” of the Obama campaign and the stupidity of Romney’s. Yet another nice diversionary tactic, MSM. And it’s working.

Ann, this reminds me of that post from about a month ago of the teenager who gave birth alone in a bathroom, after hiding her pregnancy from everyone, and then killed the baby. You asked us if we had no room for pity for the teenager since she was in such an awful situation. I did and do, but my horror at her actions overwhelmed it. While I feel pity for her, even deep pity, I feel greater pity for her baby. I guess that sums up my response here as well: I can feel deep pity for a person tormented by such horrible demons, but I'm afraid I feel much greater pity for his victims. And once again, my horror at his actions tends to overwhelm the pity I feel for him.

I'm just describing my response, I'm not recommending it as appropriate. I'm a Christian and I think I should feel greater pity for those who commit horrific crimes, since they're usually in horrific situations and I should feel pity for anyone who is in horrific situations. Plus, as the rapist makes clear, many such criminals will be haunted by the memory of the atrocities they've committed.

When I was browsing over at Amazon last night for a good read, I came across a biography of Samuel Pepys. The Amazon "Surprise Me" excerpt happened to be about his sexual proclivities as recorded in his diary. He comes across as similar to this man. The only difference is he didn't force himself on strangers. He forced himself on acquaintances, usually ones that were beholden to him in some way. I wonder what would happen to a Mr. Pepys today? Oh, hell, what I am I asking. We already know the answer to that, don't we, Mr. Clinton?

O Ritmo wrote:I don't think it was unfortunate. I think it was inevitable and about time. It affords everyone a view into the minds of those who would engineer a campaign rallying cry of "Save the Rape-Babies!" An edifying demonstration of this politically is available here.

Should we instead engineer a campaign who's rallying cry is KILL the Rape- Babies?

@nd, I can't do whimsy. Chip Ahoy is the whimsymeister. But the Obamabots killed whimsy.

Maybe I'm the only one, but I like Chip A.'s new style a lot. Of course, I wish things had turned out differently, so that he had remained whimsical, but he articulates amazingly well the frustration some of us feel with our fellow citizens.

I live in a neighborhood that's ultra-blue. Now when I see someone who fits the profile of an Obama voter--an under-30, unmarried woman--I wonder if she'd ever think of stopping me on the street and asking me to buy her some birth control pills or help her out with her student loan debt this month.

Of course she thinks she'd never do something that crazy, but in fact that's what her whole fuckin' vote was about.

I know, me too. I flipped the bird to a car on the highway with an Obama sticker this weekend--never done that before. We were camping and the people next to us had an Obama sticker too and I kept thinking the same kind of thing. "Hey lady, the asshole you just voted for is trying to force my church to commit acts that we find morally reprehensible. The asshole you just voted for is a lying scumbag. The asshole you just voted for is about to double down on his democracy-destroying, executive order, anti-American bullshit. Thanks a lot you dumb twat. Why don't you take your stupid Landcruiser with the UM plateframes and get the fuck out of Texas before you ruin this state like you and people like you ruined Michigan?

Wyo, if you insist on re-hashing here the conversation here that failed so miserably across the country Tuesday night, I guess I can't stop you. But I don't consider zygotes to be people in the first place, so you might want to understand why I'd be even less sympathetic to the idea of a rapist claiming the right for his cells to incubate in someone else's body.

Anyway, feel free to proceed if you want. As I said, I can't stop that conversation, much as it's impossible for me to see what more you figure you can get out of it politically or socially. If it's now a metaphysical discussion - but one you're still interested in, I guess that's a realistic admission of sorts: That it's now consigned to the realm of abstract theology.

I've read that rape by a stranger lurking in the bushes is actually quite uncommon. It's far more likely to be someone the victim knows.

And that's a damn good point. Not only was "date rape" a phenomenon to be dealt with, in recent, living memory legislators didn't even have a definition for "marital rape". If you were married to someone it was understood that consent was a default, 24/7 deal. That's what's so freaky about people pining for the past using terms like "legitimate rape". Which kinds were "legitimate" and in what sense?

It's quite scary to think of rape as simply one guy's coping mechanism. People don't have a great history of conquering their addictions permanently. At best, it becomes behavioral management.

And again, that's why using rape as a (coerced) excuse for pregnancy is so downright disgusting. It's been done (and condoned) throughout history, time and space and the results are that the genes of people who take by force are over-represented in our genomes, by a free society's standard. That we should encourage the traits of takers (which is what RAPISTS really are) in our own biology is pretty much the height of authoritarianism, all the way down to the most basic, biological level.

I've lost any fellow-feeling I once had. Now I will say what's true. The consequences have already happened, so I have little fear left.

It already happened, just last week after the election.

Our little neighborhood association was in danger of being overtaken by a slate of lefty candidates beholden to the Agenda 21 bullshit. And they even tried to bring in fake voters, just like for Obama. Christ almighty. I was yelling at the fake voters Shame on you, and said we will not stand for this bullshit any longer. They didn't vote, in the end. Goddamn fuckers are everywhere, trying to steal your shit with a sword or with a pen.

O Ritmo wrote: That we should encourage the traits of takers (which is what RAPISTS really are) in our own biology is pretty much the height of authoritarianism, all the way down to the most basic, biological level.

Ending a life is also a taking (of a life). Methinks that the TAKER gene is in most of us, not just the rapists. And are you are now positng that rapists transfer their rape genes onto their offspring? The nature vs nurture debate solved at last. Which genes in specific cause rape, and what percentage of kids born of rape will go on to become rapists?

Which genes in specific cause rape, and what percentage of kids born of rape will go on to become rapists?

No one knows. And it doesn't matter. The point is one of whether rape should be a "legitimate" (you guys seem to like that word) way of passing along one's traits, and perpetuating them in the collective human genome. I say no. Rapists, OTOH, might have a different view, though.

If Brony is a legitimate topic here, and I assume it is since the arbiter of all things brought it up, can I mention how neatly some commenters here fall into the rage comic category? I see that derp face or the rage face in my mind every time I read comments from the resident left.

I know that abortion is an issue with plenty of people at polar ends of the spectrum, but I think many more folks are in a mushy middle. I understand the theological reasoning of Mourdock that the baby is innocent, but I would find it infuriating if my daughter was raped and she was forced to carry the baby to term against her will. But I consider myself pro-life in that I would never want my partner or my daughters to abort a baby for the sake of convenience. And I really cannot see any justification for purely optional abortions after the first trimester.

Given that background, in my opinion for the GOP to have a long term future where 53% of voters are women, the party as a whole must agree to certain exceptions for abortion in the platform (the Clintonian "Safe, Legal and Rare"), and shun anyone who is running for a major state or federal level office that voices the "No abortion without exceptions" position. For those GOP voters who say they will not support the GOP if that is a stated party position, I say don't let the door hit you on the way out. Like having a bunch of Dems in charge of things is going to advance the pro-life position in this country.

The GOP lost at least 3 senate races and possibly the Presidency due to Akin and Mourdock. The Dems who won those races will not be voting to protect unborn babies under any circumstance.

The MSM, seeing the devastation wreaked upon Akin and Mourdock for their statements, will be pounding future candidates with similar questions hoping to TKO them out of the gate and tar the rest of the GOP.

I hate to put this into simplistic terms for you but I'm not sure if you're capable of understanding otherwise. Abortion doesn't solve rape. Two wrongs don't make a right. Having an abortion will not unrape a woman. Saying that the child is still the same whether it is conceived by rape, or by loving parents or by donated sperm does not mean that therefore rape is legitimate. Rape is wrong because its an attack on the body of an innocent person. Abortion is no different. Should a rape victim be able to find someone random person and murder them because she was raped? Or should you be put in jail and executed because your father is guilty of a crime?

Fundamentally where is the difference? I'm not talking about how a zygote is a equivalent to a fully grown human I'm talking principally. abortion simply transforms the victim into the victimizer.

THe act of rape determines how the woman is inseminated. But the process of development will occur the same whether the woman was raped or not raped. So,suggesting that somehow if se say a baby who is developing is the equivalent shouldn't be aborted it's not equivalent to saying rape is somehow legitimate. That's deeply offensive.

"I see that derp face or the rage face in my mind every time I read comments from the resident left.

It's a small mental trick that makes me smile."

Funny, wyo sis! The same thing happens to me, but when I read Chip Ahoy!

He's become Antoine De Saint-Exupery's "The Little Prince" to my mind's eye. I imagine him in sweet, watercolor illustrations as he heads out for his undercover serf experiences so that the rest of us can just wait right here for him to come back and tell us what we should have known all along.

THe act of rape determines how the woman is inseminated. But the process of development will occur the same whether the woman was raped or not raped. So,suggesting that somehow if se say a baby who is developing is the equivalent shouldn't be aborted it's not equivalent to saying rape is somehow legitimate. That's deeply offensive.

It's a separate question than what I was referring to. THe only point being, whatever the reason behind why or how a woman is inseminated, a baby will still develop the same way in her womb.THe point was in refernce to this point from Ritmo: The point is one of whether rape should be a "legitimate" (you guys seem to like that word) way of passing along one's traits, and perpetuating them in the collective human genome. I say no. Rapists, OTOH, might have a different view, though.

Which SEEMS to be suggesting that republicans are suggesting that rape is a legitmate means of insemination, i.e we are condoning rapes.

If we say, a baby is still innocent whether the mother is inseminated against her will or in a loving relationship does that mean we are saying we condone rape? And that only rapists would feel this way? A mother might not have qualms about killing her baby even if she is the victim of rape? A mother might not keep her baby even though she's the victim of a rape? ONLY a rapist will feel this way?

Let's say that a blasticist is no more alive than a piece of wood. I realize you probably disagree with that, but consider it for the moment.

Forcing a woman to have a child from rape is pretty bad. The woman may well resent the child for the rest of her life, especially if she doesn't have your world view. Furthermore, the child may get all screwed up too.

How about get rid of the thing before it becomes a person, if the woman wants to.

Let's say that a blasticist is no more alive than a piece of wood. I realize you probably disagree with that, but consider it for the moment.

I wasn't arguing that there shouldn't be exceptions for rape and Incest. I was simply arguing the point of why you might say there shouldn't be an exception in the case of rape and incest. I see the point, and agree that despite it coming from a bad situation is still innocent.. Forcing a woman to have a child from rape is pretty bad. The woman may well resent the child for the rest of her life, especially if she doesn't have your world view. Furthermore, the child may get all screwed up too.

How about get rid of the thing before it becomes a person, if the woman wants to.I think it really depends on whether you think it's simply a blasocyst or more than that (and I guess if you are defining it that way we are only talking about abortions at the very early stage of the pregnancy?). But aren't you simp,y arguing the default pro choice position, irrespective whether its a question of rape or incest?From that perspective, forcing a woman to have a child that she doesn't want (even if she isn't raped) would be pretty bad. The mother might resent the child. Further the child may get screwed up too. How about get rid of the thing before it becomes a person? It's the same exact argument.

That's right, to a point, and I think it's quite a bit of time after the blastocyst stage, it's not human life.

To me, there isn't much difference between a woman who takes birth control, a woman who doesn't want to have a child but bets pregnant, a woman who aborts because the fetus is deforemed, or a woman who takes birth control (birth control aborts blastocysts: I was surprised to find all birth control contains anti-attach drugs).

I don't think women should feel in the least bit guilty or sad, except in the event the child they are aborting is the child of some deeply religious man who believes the thing is human and disagrees with the decision to abort.

To some point. I don't know when the cells become life, but nor do I think anyone else does. Because there are mysteries in life left, like what is consciousness, that magical substance.

If the broken window means the owner has to buy a window pane, at the local hardware store, and the laborer to install it, then there is economic benefit to this activity.

So the serial rapist is stimulating the economy?! Keeping the SANE nurses fully utilized, extra billables at the hospital, giving another case to law enforcement for their stats, hiring a therapist, taking a self defense class, buying a gun, taking the CCW permit class, etc. All kinds of economic stimulation going on. Therefore, rape is good.

Please, please, please....get over it. It's done. And the sky is not falling, nor are you going to be scooped up UN stormtroopers to be taken to re-education camps. The sun came up the next day, the world didn't end. Pick yourself up and start thinking about what's next. Everything will be ok.

Well, it's true the Republican Party brand has become deeply linked to rape. And that's because of the bizarre comments on rape from multiple Republican men this year and in years past. Not just two Senators.

Republicans see rape as suspect and the raped as suspect. They think it's a cover or excuse to have an abortion, because they're pro-pregnancy. So they say these dumb things trying to explain themselves.

It's not a slip of a tongue. It's a wide pattern that reveals warped thinking in the conservative hive mind.

And, we can add to that sorry list, this post from Althouse, who now thinks any mention of rape is an assault on the Republican Party.